- When Excel is still the right tool
- Seven signs a system makes sense
- Why approvals, history and access strain Excel
- A safe order for migrating
The short answer
Whether to move off Excel is not decided by how much data you have. It is decided by whether more than one person touches it at the same time, and whether anyone will later need to see who changed what. If one person is producing figures for their own use, Excel is fine.
"Get off Excel" has taken on a life of its own as a slogan. There are situations Excel does not suit — that is all. As a tool for analysis at your own desk, it is still hard to replace.
Where Excel is the right choice
For these uses, Excel is faster and more flexible.
- One-off analysis. Numbers you need this time, in a shape you may never use again.
- A small number of people, ideally one. You, or one designated person, opens the file. Nobody else is in it simultaneously.
- Analysis whose shape is not settled. You add a column, change a condition, and look again while you work out the answer.
- Trying something before committing. Run the process in Excel first, while the shape of the work is still moving.
That last point deserves weight. Build a system before the requirements settle and you will build it twice. Running in Excel for a few months, until the fields and the exceptions are clear, is the cheaper route.
Where a system starts to make sense
If two or more of these are true, Excel is being asked to do something it is not built for.
- Several people update at once. "Open read-only, file in use" has become routine, and filenames now carry dates and initials.
- There is an approval step. Someone submits, someone reviews, something becomes final. Excel has no good way to express "this is final."
- History is required. At some point you will be asked who changed which value and when.
- Different people should see different things. One shared file exposes columns you would rather not show, and you are maintaining separate sheets to work around it.
- Personal data is involved. Files with names and contact details exist in several copies, on individual machines and in mail attachments.
- The data keeps growing. The file is slow to open, and every summary means adjusting formula ranges again.
- It repeats on a schedule. Every month, the same table is rebuilt by the same manual steps.
Approvals, history and permissions in particular are not Excel's strengths. You can work around all three, but the workaround needs someone to maintain it, and that is where the dependency starts.
A rough guide
When in doubt, read down this table.
| What to look at | Stay on Excel | Consider a system |
|---|---|---|
| People editing | One | Two or more, at the same time |
| Approval steps | None | Submit and review |
| History | Not needed | Who changed what will be asked |
| Visibility | Same for everyone | Must differ by person |
| Personal data | Not included | Included |
| Data growth | Steady | Growing continuously |
Before changing how files containing personal data are handled, settle where they are stored and how they are shared. For the principles, check the guidance published by Japan's Personal Information Protection Commission.
If you do move, move in this order
Even once you have decided, do not move everything at once.
- List the columns in the current spreadsheet that are actually used. The longer a sheet has been in use, the more unused columns you tend to find.
- List the exceptions. "This one customer has a different cut-off date" is where migrations get difficult.
- Run both in parallel for one month. Enter into Excel and the new system, and check that the totals agree.
- Once they agree, make the spreadsheet read-only. Do not delete it.
Parallel running is extra work, but skipping it means that when the numbers disagree, you have no way to tell which side is wrong.
What this looks like in practice
A parts distributor with twelve staff keeps both a stock sheet and a shift roster, including part-time staff, in Excel.
The stock sheet is fine as it is, provided one person updates it each morning and everyone else only reads it. The trouble starts when sales want to reserve stock from a customer site. Now two people need to write at once, and that is the limit.
The roster is a different story. Staff submit requests, someone approves them, and later you need to see who changed a shift and when. Approvals, history and permissions all apply at once, so staying in Excel means spending your time on version control instead of rostering.
So within one company, the honest answer can be: stock stays in Excel, shifts move to a system.
The parts you do not migrate still need naming and storage rules. Without them, neither choice reduces the time spent looking for the right file.
In short
Excel suits one-off analysis, one-person work, and analysis whose shape is still changing. The balance tips when simultaneous editing, approvals, history, permissions, personal data, growing volume and scheduled repetition start stacking up. Decide per process, not per company — there is no need to declare a company-wide policy. When you do migrate, list the columns actually in use and the exceptions, and run in parallel for a month before you switch.
APOUL Calendar
APOUL KINTAI